'It is about individual behaviors'

DW:Do you think a recommendation by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to replace the lifetime ban on blood donations from gay men with a policy barring men who have had sex with men within 12 months is a significant policy shift?

Ivan Scalfarotto: Let's be very clear: what is at risk is not people, but behaviors. There are behaviors which are clearly risky, but I think all restrictions that have to do with people, and not behavior, are unreasonable. The risk is the exchange of bodily fluids. This can happen between men and women, men and men, and even women and women. So, the only reasonable ban you can impose on blood donation has to do with risky behavior and that has nothing to do with the sexual orientation of the donor.

Three decades on, the spread of HIV is still closely associated with the gay community. Do you think the move by the US could set a precedent for other nations, including Germany, France and Italy, to review restrictions on blood donations from gay men?

Suggesting that sex between two men is, per se, riskier than sex between a man and a woman is unreasonable and still imposes a stigma on gay people. Frankly speaking, it does not touch on the issue that the only discrimination one should consider, the only difference, and the only ban that should be imposed, is on behaviors. Those issues to do with considering some people at more risk than others are irrational - for example, thinking that a celibate gay man is in a riskier position than a sexually active straight person just because of their gay status. This is not reasonable. I think the scientific community is quite clear on this, and I think there is more of a political issue behind the idea that excluding a certain section of the community removes the risk. In recent years, the gay community has done a lot of work in terms of sexual health education, while this did not appear to happen in the heterosexual community, so to speak.

We know the rate of HIV infection between straight people has been on the increase, so I think once again, this does not help because it makes straight people believe they are safe, which is not the case. So, everyone should have protected sex whatever orientation they have. This is the right message to convey.

What are the risks of lifting bans on gay men donating blood, regardless of which country has imposed the restriction?

What you should find on official forms when you are about to donate blood are questions about your behaviors. So, I think there would be no risk at all in just asking people the right questions. What we are interested in regarding blood donation, is if the person who is about to donate went through risky behavior, and was potentially exposed to the virus in the last month.

This is all about asking everyone who wants to donate blood whether they recently had unprotected sex. It is up to the health officials to do this. The question should never be, "Are you gay?" The question should be, "Have you had unprotected sex in recent months?" We do not want to know who people are, we want to know what people did. There should be no other question than this.

Ivan Scalfarotto is the Italian Under Secretary of State for Constitutional Reforms and Government Liaison to Parliament. Between 2009 and 2013 he was the Deputy Chairperson of the Italian Democratic Party.

Lucia Walton conducted the interview.